CSS Atlanta is Mentioned in Ten Historical Documents

Savannah, as a consequence of the State of Georgia joining the Confederate States of America, was blockaded by the United States Navy. Blockade-runners, in order to deliver consignments of war material to the ports of the Southern Confederacy, attempted to communicate with Savannah while its lines of communication were being disrupted by the Federal armada. CSS Fingal, which had been built in Scotland, delivered a cargo of firearms and rifled guns to Savannah. It proved to be impossible, however, for the merchantman to run the blockade of the city on a second occasion. A decision was made, therefore, to transform the blockade-runner into an iron-cased ram. A pair of Ericsson batteries waited for CSS Atlanta, as CSS Fingal became known after its conversion into a man-of-war, at Wassaw Sound. A battle between the ironclads, in the June of 1863, soon followed. CSS Atlanta, which was armed with a battery of 6-inch and 7-inch Brooke rifles, fired the opening shot of the naval engagement but the projectile missed its target. A distance of 1,500-yards existed between the iron-cased ram and the Passaic-class monitors that were approaching it. CSS Atlanta, which drew over fifteen-feet of water, ran aground at the mouth of the Wilmington River and became immobile while the Ericsson batteries were able to maintain their power of motion. Captain John Rodgers, who is named as the commander of USS Weehawken, ordered his guns to be fired when his ship was located at a distance of between 300-yards and 500-yards from the ironclad. CSS Atlanta, whose casemate was protected by four inches of laminated iron plates that were backed by eighteen-inches of timber, was able to withstand the blows of the 11-inch projectiles but was unable to resist the power of the 15-inch spherical shot. USS Weehawken fired five projectiles at CSS Atlanta, between four and five of which struck its iron shield, while USS Nahant was unable to discharge its guns during the engagement. 

1) A Complete History of the Great American Rebellion, Embracing its Causes, Events and Consequences. Vol. II. by Elliott G. Storke as well as L. P. Brockett, M.D. 

Elliott Grey Storke and Linus Pierrepoint Brockett dedicate the thirty-ninth chapter of the second volume of A Complete History of the Great American Rebellion to the capture of CSS Atlanta, the Vicksburg campaign, the surrender of Vicksburg as well as the capitulation of Port Hudson. It is claimed, on page 1018, that the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron had not won any accolades since the capture of Port Royal. Blockade-runners are reported to have been seized by the gunboats of the United States Navy but Fort McAllister and the batteries that defended Charleston Harbor, against which the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron had pitted its most powerful warships, are claimed to have withstood the power of Federal ordnance. USS Weehawken is reported to have captured CSS Atlanta, which is described as a Rebel ironclad steamer or as an armored steamship, in the summer of the third year of the War of Secession. It is claimed that the capture of CSS Atlanta helped to restore the prestige of the United States Navy and, on page 1119, proved that the monitors of the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron were superior to the ironclads of the Confederate States Navy. CSS Fingal, which is described as a swift and powerful British steamer, is reported to have communicated with Savannah while the city was under blockade. It is claimed that the blockade-runner, after the capture of Fort Pulaski and the tightening of the blockade of the inland waterways had prevented its escape, was converted into an ironclad. CSS Atlanta, after its transformation had been completed, is reported to have had an extreme length of two-hundred and four-feet and a beam of forty-one feet while its draught of water is claimed to have been fifteen-feet and nine-inches. It is reported that the expedition from Savannah to the entrance of Wassaw Sound lasted from the 7th of June until the 16th of June, 1863, while the engagement with the Ericsson batteries is claimed to have occurred on the following morning.

2) Blue and Gray: The Patriotic Magazine, Vol. III. by Joseph W. Morton.

Xanthus Smith, whose article about the ironclads which served in the Confederate States Navy is included in the third volume of Blue and Gray: The Patriotic Magazine, identifies some common traits that existed among the protected fighting vessels that participated in the American Civil War. Joseph W. Morton, who included the article in the sixth issue of the magazine, compiled and curated a series of historical documents about the War of the Rebellion. Smith, whose article was published in the June of 1894, casts doubt upon the accomplishments of the ironclads that had served in the Confederate States Navy and the United States Navy. It is suggested, on page 342, that the military successes of the iron-plated fighting vessels which fought in the War of the Rebellion did not warrant the amount of money that was spent on their construction. One grand dash or sally, to paraphrase Smith, was typical of the careers of the ironclads that fought for the independence of the Southern States of America. CSS Atlanta, CSS Albemarle, CSS Chicora and CSS Palmetto State are reported to have been completed at the time in which they sought battle with the United States Navy. Naval engagements between the armoured ships, which Smith refers to as armored ships, of the Federal armada and the insurgent fleet are claimed to have been infrequent. It is reported that the ironclads of the Confederate States Navy, which are claimed to have fought armoured ships-of-war as well as unprotected fighting vessels, experienced varying levels of failure and success. CSS Atlanta, to paraphrase Smith, succumbed at once to USS Weehawken and its superior weight of metal. It is claimed that CSS Atlanta, despite its iron shield, was vulnerable to the ordnance of the Federal armada. USS Weehawken, at an undisclosed location and on an unspecified date, is reported to have disproven the notion that CSS Atlanta was invulnerable to the projectiles that were fired by the ironclads of the the United States Navy.

3) Footprints of Four Centuries: The Story of the American People. Comprising the Important Events, Episodes, and Incidents which Make Up the Marvellous Record from Columbus to the Present Time. by Hamilton W. Mabie.

Colonel Alexander Kelly McClure, who composed the seventeenth chapter of Footprints of Four Centuries: The Story of the American People, explains the causes of the American Civil War and describes the influence of ironclads upon the evolution of naval warfare. Hamilton W. Mabie, who published the compilation of written works in 1895, chose which articles should be included in the anthology. McClure, who is described as the editor and proprietor of the Philadelphia Times, cites the duel between CSS Merrimac and USS Monitor as one of the defining moments in the annals of naval warfare. It is reported, on page 328, that the government of the Southern States of America believed that ironclads could raise the blockade that the United States Navy had imposed upon its ports. Savannah and New Orleans, for example, are claimed to have been placed under Federal blockade. CSS Fingal, which is described as an English ironclad steamer that had enjoyed a successful career as a blockade-runner, is reported to have been converted into an iron-cased ram. CSS Fingal, after its transformation into a man-of-war had been completed, is claimed to have been one of the most powerful ironclads that the Confederate States Navy or the United States Navy had built during the War of Secession. Rear-admiral Samuel Francis Du Pont is reported to have ordered USS Nahant and USS Weehawken to fight the ironclad, which is described as the most dangerous engine-of-war that had ever been produced, on one of the estuaries of the Savannah River. CSS Atlanta, as CSS Fingal became known, is claimed to have challenged the Passaic-class monitors to battle. It is reported, on page 329, that CSS Atlanta fired the opening shot of the engagement of the 17th of June. USS Weehawken, on page 330, is claimed to have pierced the iron shield of CSS Atlanta with its first shot and is reported to have silenced its guns. A white flag, thereafter, is claimed to have been raised onboard the iron-cased ram.

4) Frank Leslie's Popular Monthly. Vol XXVII.-January to June, 1889. by Various Authors.

Alvan S. Southworth, whose article about ships and shipbuilding is included in the twenty-seventh volume of Frank Leslie's Popular Monthly, describes the evolution of naval warfare in the nineteenth-century. It is reported, on page 309, that naval tactics adapted to the technological innovations that occurred at the dawn of the modern era. Advances in naval technology, on page 311, are claimed to have confined the traditional naval battle to the annals of history. Iron-plating, rams, rifled ordnance, steam-engines, torpedoes and the emergence of larger guns are reported to have changed the nature of naval warfare. An increase in the range of artillery is claimed to have expanded the distance at which warships fought one another while traditional naval engagements, of which the Battle of Lissa and the Battle of Iquique are cited as examples, are claimed to have become a thing of the past. It is explained, on page 312, that the Battle of Wassaw Sound was fought in a land-locked harbour and it is implied that the naval duel was among the last traditional battles that were fought between warships. CSS Atlanta, to paraphrase Southworth, sought battle with USS Nahant and USS Weehawken in the early daylight. It is reported that the Ericsson batteries, when they noticed that the ironclad was descending the Wilmington River, approached their adversary with all of the speed that they could muster. CSS Atlanta is reported to have opened fire on its opponents at a distance of 1,500-yards while USS Weehawken is claimed to have discharged its guns at a range of 300-yards. It is claimed that CSS Atlanta, in what is described as one of the most dramatic and decisive battles of the American Civil War, was struck by five projectiles. Casualties, which are reported to have occurred after three shots perforated the ironclad, are claimed to have been sustained by the inhabitants of the casemate. CSS Atlanta, after an engagement that lasted for a duration of fifteen minutes, is claimed to have surrendered to its opponents.

5) History of the Civil War in America. Volume III. by Comte de Paris.

The Comte de Paris, who dedicates the third chapter of the third volume of History of the Civil War in America to Suffolk, describes the capture of CSS Atlanta by the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron. CSS Fingal, on page 165, is identified as a blockade-runner that communicated with Savannah. On the 12th of November, 1861, the merchantman is reported to have delivered a consignment of cannons and small-arms to the city. It is claimed that the blockade-runner, after it was unable to escape from Savannah, was purchased by the government of the Southern Confederacy and transformed into a man-of-war. An inclined casemate, which is reported to have been situated at the centre of the deck, is claimed to have been constructed on top of the iron hull of the blockade-runner. It is claimed that the casemate was designed to deflect projectiles while a pilot-house and a smokestack, on page 166, are reported to have been situated on the terrace of the casemate. Four Brooke rifles, which are claimed to have had a caliber of six-inches and seven-inches, are reported to have been similar to the guns that had perforated USS Keokuk at Charleston Harbor while three portholes are claimed to have been available for each of the seven-inch rifles. Eighteen inches of timber, from which the casemate is reported to have been constructed, are claimed to have been covered with two layers of rolled iron. It is reported that the iron plates, which the Comte du Paris suggests were made from flattened railroad iron, were two-inches in thickness and seven inches in width. CSS Fingal, according to the Comte du Paris, was known as CSS Atlanta after its conversion had been completed. CSS Atlanta is reported to have been fitted out for a cruise of the Atlantic Ocean or the Atlantic Coast. Details of the events that led up to the Battle of Wassaw Sound, which can be found on pages 168 and 169, include the abandoned expedition to Fort Pulaski which CSS Atlanta undertook in January.

6) New England Magazine. An Illustrated Monthly. New Series, Vol. 7. Old Series, Vol. 13. by Various Authors.

Captain Joseph W. Alexander, on page 208 of the seventh volume of the old series of New England Magazine, describes the course of events that led up to the capture of CSS Atlanta and the beginning of his time in Federal captivity. A private contractor, whose name is not revealed, is claimed to have constructed the iron-cased ram at the lower end of Savannah. Alexander, who is identified as the executive officer onboard the ironclad, reports that the guns had been placed onboard the fighting vessel and contends that the ship was nearing a state of completion. It is implied, from the claim that that the ironclad had not been delivered to the government of the Confederate States of America, that the fighting vessel was the property of the private contractor. Captain McBlair, whose first name is not mentioned, is reported to have been assigned to the command of the ironclad while the other officers are claimed to have reported for duty at the same time in which Alexander arrived at the city. It is claimed that the warship, which is described as an iron steamer that was built in Scotland, had begun its career as a blockade-runner. The government of the Southern Confederacy, after the merchantman had run the blockade of Savannah, is reported to have purchased the trading vessel. It could be argued, therefore, that the private contractor was the custodian or guardian of the ironclad while the government of the Confederate Republic may be regarded as the true owner of the war vessel. An unnamed shipwright in Scotland, therefore, had constructed the blockade-runner while a private contractor had transformed the merchantman into an ironclad on the Savannah River. Pine logs, onto which two layers of iron bars are reported to have been bolted, are claimed to have formed the sloping sides of the casemate. Alexander, in contradiction of the reports that CSS Atlanta had been captured at Wassaw Sound, claims that the ironclad had surrendered to the Ericsson batteries at Ossabar Sound.

7) Proceedings of the United States Naval Institute. Volume IX. by the United States Naval Institute.

Lieutenant Edward W. Very, whose article about the development of armour for naval use appears in the ninth volume of Proceedings of the United States Naval Institute, provides technical information about CSS Atlanta as well as the ironclads that it fought at Wassaw Sound. It is claimed, on page 387, that a charge of 35-lbs of gunpowder was used to discharge projectiles that measured 15-inches in diameter. Monitors of the Passaic-class, on page 395, are described as an improvement of the original USS Monitor and it is implied that these ironclads constituted the second generation of armoured turret-ships that were built for the United States Navy. USS Nahant and USS Weehawken are claimed to have belonged to the Passaic-class of monitors while CSS Atlanta, on page 400, is reported to have been representative of the typical ironclad that was built for the Confederate States Navy. CSS Fingal, which is described as a blockade-runner that was powered by steam-engines, is claimed to have been converted into an ironclad ram. A raft of logging is reported to have been constructed on top of the iron hull of the blockade-runner and, on page 401, is claimed to have sloped down to the line of the water. An undisclosed number of iron plates, which are reported have been half an inch in thickness, are claimed to have covered the wooden raft. Fifteen-inches of pine logs and three-inches of oak planks are reported to have formed the casemate while two layers of iron plates, which were two-inches in thickness, are claimed to have provided the superstructure with its protective shield. USS Weehawken is reported to have struck CSS Atlanta with four projectiles and it is reported, on page 402, that the iron shield of CSS Atlanta was capable of obstructing the passage of an 11-inch projectile but was unable to withstand the destructive power of a 15-inch shot. USS Weehawken, at a distance of 500-yards from CSS Atlanta, is claimed to have discharged its 11-inch projectile with a 20-pound charge of gunpowder.

8) The Century Illustrated Monthly Magazine. November 1885 to April 1886. Vol. XXXI. New Series Vol. IX. by Various Authors.

John Ericsson, whose article about monitors appears in the thirty-first volume of the old series of The Century Illustrated Monthly Magazine, describes the circumstances under which the first ironclads were constructed and explores the evolution of ships-of-war that were protected by iron plates. Technical innovations that had occurred in Europe, on page 280, are reported to have influenced the architectural designs of the Confederate States Navy and the United States Navy. General Paixhans, in 1824, is claimed to have invented the shell-gun while La Gloire is identified as the first ironclad. It is reported that the Paixhans gun and La Gloire, which is claimed to have been built in 1858, revolutionised naval warfare. Ten weeks, on page 296, are reported to have passed between the First Battle of Charleston Harbor and the Battle of Wassaw Sound. It is claimed that the potentates of Europe, upon observing the engagement of the 17th of June, arrived at the conclusion that HMS Warrior and La Gloire had been rendered obsolete by the ordnance of the United States Navy. USS Weehawken, to paraphrase Ericsson, fired a projectile that struck CSS Atlanta at an angle of fifty-degrees to the line of the keel. It is reported that the missile, due to the generation of a compound angle, approached the slanted sides of the ironclad at an angle of twenty-two degrees. Forty men, who are reported to have been serving on the gun-deck of CSS Atlanta, are claimed to have been prostrated by a fifteen-inch spherical shot that struck the casemate. A hail of debris is reported to have been released inside the casemate, which Ericsson describes as the citadel, when the projectile collided with its iron shield. Shards of iron and splinters of wood, which travelled at high velocity, are reported to have wounded fifteen of the mariners who were present within the citadel. Four-inches of iron and a backing of eighteen-inches of wood, according to Ericsson, was insufficient to obstruct the passage of a fifteen-inch projectile. 

9) The United Service Review. A Quarterly Review of Military and Naval Affairs. Volume I. by Various Authors.

Captain George Eugene Belknap, whose article about USS New Ironsides appears in the first volume of The United Service Review, provides information about the ironclads that served in the Confederate States Navy and the United States Navy. It is reported, on page 70, that the Federal ironclads which had attacked the insurgent batteries at Charleston Harbor had undergone repairs at New York and Port Royal. USS Nahant and USS Weehawken, after their repairs had been completed, are claimed to have been dispatched to Wassaw Sound. It is reported that the Passaic-class monitors, which are claimed to have been under the command of Commander John Downes and Commander John Rodgers, were sent to blockade CSS Atlanta as well as engage it in combat. USS Nahant and USS Weehawken are reported to have arrived at Wassaw Sound at an unspecified date while CSS Atlanta, which is described as a Confederate ram, is reported to have descended the Savannah River. Downes and Rodgers, to paraphrase Belknap, did not have to wait long for the arrival of their adversary. CSS Atlanta, which is claimed to have flown its flags with an air of pride, is reported to have been confident of victory. USS Weehawken, at the time in which CSS Atlanta entered the estuary, is claimed to have opened fire at a distance of three-hundred yards. It is reported that the Passaic-class monitors, which are claimed to have adopted an offensive posture, were armed with 15-inch guns. CSS Atlanta, on page 71, is reported to have surrendered before USS Nahant was able to discharge its guns. A flotilla of small steamers, which are claimed to escorted CSS Atlanta to the scene of battle, are reported to have conveyed a group of spectators to the mouth of Wassaw Sound. It is claimed that the pleasure-parties, as Belknap describes the spectators, had expected to witness the victory of CSS Atlanta but the flotilla is reported to have ascended the Savannah River when they saw that the ironclad had been captured.

10) The Works of William H. Seward by William Henry Seward.

William Henry Seward, on page 108 of the fifth volume of the new series of The Works of William H. Seward, describes the naval engagement that occurred on the estuary of the Wilmington River. George E. Baker, while Seward is acknowledged as the author of the work, is reported to have edited the compilation of articles. CSS Atlanta, which is described as the most formidable ironclad that was available to the insurgents, is reported to have descended Wilmington River on the 17th of June. It is claimed that the iron-plated ram, prior to its excursion along the watercourse, had been situated at Savannah. USS Nahant and USS Weehawken, which are described as national ironclads, are reported to have engaged CSS Atlanta when it arrived at the mouth of the Wilmington River. Captain John Rodgers is named as the commander of USS Weehawken while USS Nahant, which is identified as the target of the first shot that was fired in the battle, is reported to have been commanded by Commander John Downes. It is claimed that the opening shot of the battle, which is reported to have been fired at fifty-four minutes past four in the morning, passed the stern of USS Weehawken and missed USS Nahant by a small margin. USS Weehawken, at a quarter past five in the morning, is reported to have discharged its guns at a range of three-hundred yards from the opposing ironclad. It is claimed that CSS Atlanta, whose commander is not named, had run aground by the time in which USS Weehawken fired its first shot. CSS Atlanta, which is reported to have been struck by four of the five missiles that USS Weehawken launched in its direction, is claimed to have surrendered at half-past five in the morning. Thirty-six minutes had passed, if Seward can be regarded as reliable source, between the time in which the first shot of the battle was fired and the moment that CSS Atlanta surrendered. Seward, on page 95, reports that that he had learned of the capture of the ironclad from the insurgent press.